AGENDA - General Committee - 20100601GENERAL COMMITTEE,
AGENDA
NO.10-12
TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 2010
1mmo0 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AURORA TOWN HALL
PUBLIC RELEASE
May 28, 2010
Aungoi A
TOWN OF AURORA
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING
AGENDA
NO. 10-12
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
Councillor MacEachern in the Chair
1 DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST
11 APPROVAL OF AGENDA
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the agenda as circulated by the Customer and Legislative Services
Department be approved.
111 DETERMINATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
IV ADOPTION OF ITEMS NOT REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
V DELEGATIONS
(a) David Bronskill/Sheldon Fenton/Nancy Henderson pg. 1
and Brian Spence
Re: Request to Repeal Designation By-law 5053-08
The Blacksmith Tree
(b) Kathy van Nostrand pg. 2
Re: Item 12(1) HAC10-04 Heritage Advisory Committee
Recommendation Summary from Monday, May 10, 2010
General Committee Agenda
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Page 2 of 7
VI PRESENTATIONS BY THE COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVE
Vll CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REQUIRING SEPARATE DISCUSSION
Vlll NEW BUSINESS/GENERAL INFORMATION —COUNCILLORS
IX CLOSED SESSION
RECOMMENDED:
THAT General Committee resolve_ into a Closed Session, following
adjournment, to consider:.
1) Personal matters about an identifiable individual, including
municipal or local board employees; re: Appointments to the Joint
Compliance Audit Committee
X ADJOURNMENT
General Committee Agenda
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Page 3 of 7
AGENDA ITEMS
1. CA010-008 Aurora Town Hall - Space Accommodation Study
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council receive this report for information; and
.pg. 3
THAT staff proceed with a Request for Proposals for architectural
services for the proposed redesign of Aurora Town Hall.
2. IES10-022 - Train Anti -Whistle in the Town of Aurora pg. 8
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council authorize proceeding with pedestrian gates at the
Regional crossings at the following locations in accordance with the
Regional Policy:
• _Wellington Street East - Mileage 29.99 — Metrolinx, Newmarket
Subdivision;
• St. John's Sideroad — Mileage 31.28 — Metrolinx, Newmarket
Subdivision;
THAT Council approve Capital Project No. 31090 (Regional Road
Pedestrian Gates) with a capital budget of $260,000 for the installation
of the above gates for which the Region of York commits to reimburse
the entire cost upon completion of the works;
THAT Council request that York Region commit to advance the
necessary funds based on results of the tendering process for costs
related to the pedestrian crossing located at the regional roads;
THAT Council authorize Capital Project No. 73127 to proceed with
pedestrian gates at the Town crossing at the following locations and
approve a capital budget of $180,000 from the Municipal Road
Infrastructure Investment fund:
• Engelhard Drive - Mileage 29.17 — Metrolinx, Newmarket
Subdivision;
• Centre Street — Mileage 30.04 — Metolinx, Newmarket Subdivision;
and
General Committee Agenda
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Page 4 of 7
THAT Council authorize Capital Project No. 73127 to proceed with a
pedestrian gate for a new pedestrian crossing at the Cousins Drive
location and provide additional funding of $110,000 from the Municipal
Road Infrastructure Investment Fund, to provide a total budget of
$160,000 for this initiative.
3. IES10-025- Award of Tender No. IES2010-26 for the Supply pg. 27
and Deliver of Replacement Truck Nos. 205 and 206
for Parks and Recreation Services
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Tender No. IES2010-26 for the Supply. and Delivery of one full
size truck with dump box and one full size crew cab be awarded to
Forbes Ford Sales Ltd. at the tendered price of $71,441.00 excluding
taxes, registration and licensing.
4. IES10-026- Award of Request for Proposal No. PW2009-78 pg. 29
Supply and Delivery of One Combination Sewer Cleaner
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Request for Proposal No. PW2009-78 — For the Supply and
Delivery of One 2010 Combination Sewer Cleaner, be awarded to Joe
Johnson Equipment Inc. at the submitted price of $325,930, excluding .
taxes; and
THAT Council approve the additional funding of $25,930 above the
original budget allocation of $300,000 for this purchase from the
Equipment Reserve account where surplus funds are available through
the 2009 Capital vehicle purchases.
5. IES10-027- Award of Tender No. IES2010-35 — Installation of pg. 32
HVAC & Energy Management Retro-Fits at the
Aurora Family Leisure Complex
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Tender No. IES2010-35 - Installation of HVAC & Energy
Management Retro-Fits at the Aurora Family Leisure Complex be
awarded to Canadian Tech Air Systems Ltd. at the tendered price of
$553,100, excluding taxes;
General Committee Agenda
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Page 5 of 7
THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute the necessary
Agreements for the project; and
THAT the remaining surplus budget be retained within the program to
be applied to future energy retrofit projects.
6. 1. IES10-028- Inflow & Infiltration Program Participation pg. 36
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council endorse Town of Aurora's participation on the Inflow
and Infiltration Reduction Task Force sponsored by York Region for
the purposes of:
• Continuing to identify sources -of inflow and infiltration;
• Developing standards and guidelines to reduce inflow and
infiltration within the system;
• Develop funding and cost sharing principles to implement future
remediation projects.
7. IES10-029- Installation of Sidewalk at Industrial Parkway and pg. 39.
Wellington Street to Improve Student Pedestrian
Safety
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council authorize the budget of $100,000 for the design and
construction of a sidewalk on the north side of Wellington Street from
Industrial Parkway east to 230 Wellington Street and on the west side
of Industrial Parkway from Wellington Street North to Centre Street;
THAT the purchasing by-law be waived and that Staff be authorized to
sole source the consulting services to Cole Engineering Group to an
upset limit of $16,000, excluding taxes for the detailed design and
contract administration in order to ensure construction is completed
prior to September 2010; and
THAT this project be funded $90,000 from development charges and
$10,000 from surplus funds related to the Old Yonge Street Sidewalk
Extension Project (No. 31043), and the Centre Street and Catherine
Avenue Sidewalk Project (No. 31044).
General Committee Agenda
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Page 6 of 7
8. PR10-009 — Follow-up to Relocation of Light Pole at Stewart pg. 44
Burnett Park Baseball Diamond
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council increase the budget for the baseball diamond by
$8,000.00; and
THAT trees be planted by Weller Tree Service in the amount of
$7,980.00 to provide screening for the adjacent resident.
9. PR10-018 - Selection of Food Vendors for the Concerts pg. 47
in the Park and Movies in the Park Events for 2010
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council approves the selection of M&M Meat Shops and
Poppers Popcorn for all Town of Aurora Concert in the Park and
Movies in the Park events for 2010.
10. PR10-021- Seniors 55+ Hockey Tournament Request for pg. 50
Waived or Reduced Fees
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council provide direction in this matter.
11. PL10-041- Application for Exemption from Part Lot Control pg. 53
CountryWide Homes Inc.
Plan 65M-4079,
Lots 45 & 46, File Number: D12-PLC-07-09
(Related File: D12-00-1A)
RECOMMENDED:
THAT Council approve Application for Exemption from Part Lot Control
submitted by Country Wide Homes Inc. to divide Lots 45 & 46 on Plan
65M-4079 into four (4) separate lots; and,
THAT Council enact By-law 5247-10.
General Committee Agenda
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Page 7 of 7
12. HAC10-04 - Heritage Advisory Committee Minutes pg. 60
of May 10, 2010
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the Heritage Advisory Committee Meeting minutes of the May
10, 2010 meeting be received for information and the
recommendations contained therein be approved.
13. EDAC10-03 - Economic Development Advisory Committee pg. 71
Minutes of May 13, 2010
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting
minutes of the May 13, 2010 meeting be received for information and
the recommendations contained therein be approved.
14. LSAC10-03 — Leisure Services Advisory Committee pg.78
Minutes of May 20, 2010
RECOMMENDED:
THAT the Leisure Services Advisory Committee Meeting minutes of
the May 20, 2010 meeting be received for information and the
recommendations contained therein be approved.
General committee Agenda
dune 1; 2010
Delegation (a) - 1
From: support@protocolis.ca
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 11:48 AM
'o: Janzen, Cindy
Subject: Town of Aurora Website - Delegation Request Form
Town =
BusinessTelephone
Email
PostalCooe = r
MeetingDate = June 1, 2010 - General Committee Fax = 416-352-1689 Name =David Bronskill / Sheldon Fenton? Nancy
Henderson Subject = Request by Owner to Repeal Designation Bylaw 5053-08.R "The Blacksmith Tree" 15278 Yonge
Street Address = 600-161 Eglinton Ave East Purpose = The delegation will speak to the owner?s request to repeal the
Designation By -taw 5053-08.R ?The Blacksmith Tree? ? 15278 Yonge Street; which request is supported by the
Heritage Committee (see May 10, 2010 committee minutes):
Group = 15278 Yonge Street Limited
-9-
General Committee Agenda
,June 1, 2010
Delegation (b) - 1
Customer and Legislative Services
Town Clerk
905urora23
AURORA �- info@eurora.ca
iTown of Aurora
. Yewlee- iJL fjond.cotrtp"/ 1 Municipal Drive,
Box 10DD. Aurora. ON L4G 6.11
DELEGATION REQUEST
Rppuests for delegation status, any written submissions and background information for .
consideration by Council or committees of Council must be submitted to the Clerk's office by
4:30 P.M. ON THE MONDAY PRIOR TO THE REQUESTED MEETING
PLEASE PRINT
COUNCILICOMMITTEE/ADVISORY COMMITTEE DATE:s
NAME OF GROUP OR PERSON(S) BEING REPRESENTED (if applicable)
BRIEF STATEMENT OF ISSUE OR PURPOSE OF DEPUTATION
Personal information on this form is collected under the legal authority" of the Municipal Act, as amended. The information is
collected and maintained for the purpose of creating a record that is available to the general public, pursuant to Section 27 of
the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Questions about this collection should be directed to
the Town Clerk, Town.of Aurora 1 Municipal Drive Box 1000 Aurora, ON L4G 6,11 Telephone 905 727-3123.
� d
Community
_2.
General Committee Agenda (ITEM # 1 - 1
,June 1, 2010
TOWN OF AURORA
AURORA GENERAL COMMITTEE No. CA016-008
SUBJECT: Aurora Town Hall- Space Accommodation Study
FROM: Nell Garbe, Chief Administrative Officer
DATE: June 1, 2010
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Council receive this report for information; and
THAT staff proceed with a Request for Proposals for architectural services for the
proposed redesign of Aurora Town Hall.
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
To seek Council direction on a recommended approach to managing the growth
pressures at Aurora Town Hall,
BACKGROUND
Aurora Town Hall opened in 1991.to host 58 employees and service a population of
29,500 residents. As Aurora's population increased, the staff complement at Town Hall
also grew to approximately 110 employees servicing over 53,000 residents in 2010. Over
the next decade, Aurora's population is anticipated to continue to increase to 70,400
people. In order to effectively service our growing population, staff initiated a Space
Accommodation Study for Town Hall in 2008.
The purpose of the study was to determine the longterm space pressures on Town Hall
and to develop a strategy to best accommodate the anticipated growth. The study also
examined the Town's current space, standards within the context of municipal and
corporate benchmarks and considered departmental adjacencies to determine whether
the building could be configured more efficiently. Staff have been working with Mayhew
and Associates since lafe 2608 and are pleased to announce that we have completed our
preliminary space needs assessment. Based on the analysis, it is expected that the
proposed changes to Town Hall could accommodate between 145 and 175 employees.
COMMENTS
Study based on extensive staff consultation
The Space Accommodation Study was built on extensive consultation that included
Council, the Executive Leadership Team, management and staff. In 2008 and 2009,
-3=
General Committee Agenda ITEM # .
June 1, 2010 - -1—�
June 1, 2010 - 2 - Report No. CAO10-008
Mayhew and Associates conducted two rounds of stakeholder interviews and focus
groups to. better understand space needs across the corporation. Figure 1 below
illustrates the methodology used to complete the study:
Figure 1: Space Accommodation Study Methodology
Validation Sessions
Rfignment...:::-:—.-_
_ --
r
.Y11m .Rmm[
•Nrt..mel,�v3
.dpANaYMNOJIin
.Bu.MaaNs
.PMMiM:e
.QCdt .W43EM
S'bNNI'tln
JbIMLMI,b
.SnRf&a'azn
MW
{omHa% ,Fe%eMn
•link mn
.4hh.Mnn,en,
ehbYma
{+dq,eStratlm
.bml •9Nr.+r+Ma
•H+n#b
.WoNu/e,gbbJti.a
aMTPMaP,<
.NC14 mHNM
gkuu JFaSm3
rTbvDM
.4[Jpptl6
aYUR4n
bl{aP,leneM
.deW, .Wxaglm'
.MtrckNV
.JF e'�MmIW
P'��+a
-Ma=eM3eMe
�Lt,r>�n 'folNr,rxkn
.Fr3n.nSe
-01MYga,aMVp
ilxKOly
WSuui
G+y,t .Tmmt
.h+xame6on
•(VNJ1YdaR'
Oan,we
'
q Z
Source: Mayhew and Associates, 2010
Subsequently, a draft space standard was recommended that was benchmarked against
.similar jurisdictions to calculate the space needs for Aurora Town Hall.
Analysis concludes that Town. Hall can accommodate the planned -growth
The study concluded that Town Hall could accommodate the anticipated growth provided
that certain physical changes occur.. These include revisiting workspace standards, a
reconfiguration of building functions and better capturing under utilized space. The study
also considered an expansion to Town Hall, as allowed for in the original building design,
as a possible option to accommodate the anticipate growth: However, this was
determined to be cost prohibitive and limited the town ability to respond to growth
pressures beyond the 2020 planning horizon. The consultants also recommended a .
centralized customer service model that focused all non-scheduled public interaction to
the 1st Floor. The following space standards were recommended:
Figure 2: Comparison _ Aurora Proposed Worksetting Standard
Source: Mavhew and Associates. 2010 '
-4-
General Committee Agenda I ITEM # 1 - 3
June 1, 2010
June 1, 2010 - 3 - Report No. CA010-008
As illustrated in Figure 2, the proposed worksetting standards are generally consistent
with standards in the public and private sectors. For the purpose of this analysis, Mayhew
and Associates have used the proposed worksetting standards to conduct the space
needs assessment. However, staff are reviewing various space standards options for
implementation.
The recommended building configuration focuses on redesigned workspaces
Based on a study of relationships, the recommended building reconfiguration focused on
a revamp and redesign of all interior workspaces. Based on the study, the following
building. configuration was recommended:
1$t Floor
Depa rtmentslF unctions
p ,, • Councillor Workspace/Lounge
f 1 • Corporate Customer Service
•Corporate and Financial Services (Cash Office)
w: s �� .. • IT Services
1— .,/ �- • Parks and Recreation Services
MJ tBylaw Services
jam ro7in
Preliminary Graphic Representation that may be subject to change
2nd Floor
Preliminary Graphic Representation that may be subject to change
Departments/Functions
• • Office of the Mayor
• Office of the CAO
'} • Legal Services
-- • Customer & Legislative Services
-5-
General Committee Agenda ITEM # 1 - 4
June 1, 2010
June 1, 2010 - 4 Report No. CAO10-008
3rd Floor
Departments/Functions
• Corporate & Financlal Services
• Building Services
• Planning & Development Services
• Infrastructure & Environmental Services
• Human Resources
Preliminary Graphic Representation that may be subject to change
ALTERNATIVES TO THE RECOMMENDATION
1. Council may choose not to proceed with a Request for Proposals for architectural
services for the proposed redesign of Aurora Town Hall.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The funding required to contract architectural services for the proposed redesign of
Aurora Town Hall is approved in the 2010 budget. The architect will be preparing a
detailed costing estimate. At that time, Council will need to consider funding sources to
complete the work. Staff will provide an update on the estimated costs and request
funding as part of the 2011 budget process.
CONCLUSIONS
Since the construction of Aurora Town Hall, the Town has experienced a significant
increase in both population and employment. In 2008, staff initiated a Space
Accommodation Study to determine the long term space pressures on Aurora Town Hall
and to develop a strategy to best accommodate the anticipated growth. The analysis
concluded that a reconfiguration of building functions coupled with revised space
standards could accommodate the anticipated growth. Staff are recommending to
proceed with a request for proposals for architectural services to complete the proposed
redesign.
-6-
vene.rai %.00rnmittee Agenaa I ITEM # 1 - 5
June 1, 2010
June 1, 2010 5 - Report No. CAO10-008
ATTACHMENTS
None.
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
This report was reviewed at the Executive Leadership Team meeting on May 19, 2010.
Prepared by. Anthony lerullo, Manager of. Strategic initiatives, ext. 4742.
Neil Garble
Chief Administrative.Officer .
-7-
General Committee Agenda ITEM #
June 1, 2010
' TOWN OF AURORA.
4kJRC" GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No. IES10.022
SUBJECT: Train Anti -Whistle In the Town of Aurora
FROM: limar Simanovskis, Director of Infrastructure & Environmental
Services
DATE: June 1, 2010
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Council authorize proceeding with pedestrian gates at the Regional
crossings at the following locations in accordance with. the Regional Policy:
• Wellington Street East - Mileage 29.99 . Metrolinx, Newmarket Subdivision,
• St. John's Sideroad � Mileage 31.28 - Metrolinx, Newmarket Subdivision;
THAT Council approve Capital Project No..31090 (Regional Road Pedestrian
Gates).with a capital budget of $260,000 for the installation of the above gates for
which the Region of York commits to reimburse the entire cost upon completion
of the works;
THAT Council request that York Region commit to advance- the necessary funds.
based on results of the tendering process for costs related to the pedestrian
crossing located at the -regional roads,
THAT Council authorize Capital Project No. 73127 to proceed with; pedestrian
gates at the Town crossing at the following locations and approve a capital
budget of $180,000 from the Municipal Road Infrastructure Investment fund.
• Engelhard Drive -Mileage 29.17-+ Metrolinx, Newmarket Subdivision;
• Centre Street- Mileage 30.04 -* Metolinx, Newmarket Subdivision;. and
THAT Council authorize Capital Project No..73127 to proceed with a pedestrian
gate for a new pedestrian crossing at the Cousins Drive location and provide
additional funding of $110,000 from the Municipal Road Infrastructure Investment
Fund, to provide a total budget of $160,000 for this initiative.
P.U. POSE OF THE. REPORT
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update on the train whistle
cessation project and seek Council approval for funds to design and install pedestrian
gates at the Town's various railway crossings.
-s-
General. Committee Agenda ITEM #jE
June 1, 2010
June 1, 2010 - 2 - Report No. IES10-022
BACKGROUND
Town of Aurora staff has been actively working to eliminate train whistles along the
Newmarket subdivision at the four -level crossings (Engelhard Drive, Wellington Street
East, Centre Street and St. John's Sideroad) and -at a proposed level railway pedestrian
crossing at Cousins Drive. Refer to Appendix "A" for crossing locations. -
A number of Council reports have been submitted regarding the train whistle cessation
policy. Council report no. PW09-067 - Train Anti -Whistle in the Town of Aurora and the
resolution are attached as Appendix "B". This report provides an update on recent
activities. Detailed Town of Aurora anti -whistling initiatives are attached as Appendix "C"
and a flow chart of the approval process and the Towns progress through that process
are included as Appendix "D". .
COMMENTS
Number of Responsible Authorities for the Anti Whistle Project and the Need for a
Coordinated Effort Extends Approval Process
The process to implement anti whistling has taking.a considerable effort and has been
further complicated by the number, of authorities involved in the decision and approval
process: Staff has been actively communicating with all parties in this process to ensure
that all issues are addressed as they arise so that progress may continue. Although
several anti -whistle. crossings exist in various communities in Ontario, the authorities
have been clear in their communication that many of these crossings have been in.
place for some time and have not been subjected to the level of approvals as is
currently required.
There are a number of municipalities in York Region either exploring or pursuing anti -
whistling, however, Aurora will be the first to achieve this goal at this scale and has
made the most progress to date, to the point that the Town is being used as the
example by the authorities on how the process should proceed. The various authorities
are summarized below for information:
Transport Canada: Sets policy, regulations and guidelines related to, among
other things, rail safety. Road and railway authorities are required to request a
Transport Canada railway safety inspector to inspect the crossing to confirm their
assessment that the crossing meets the requirements of the whistle cessation
guideline.
Metrolinx (formerly GO Transit): is the sole owner of the Town of Newmarket.
subdivision and currently operates eight commuter trains per weekday. They are
also an approval authority in relation to their operations and how proposed
changes may impact commuter safety.
-9-.
General Committee Agenda I ITEM # 2 - 3
.June 1, 2010
June 1, 2010 - 3 - Report No. IES10-022
• Canadian National Railway: is the operating railway as the holder of the
Certificate of Fitness. They are a stakeholder and will be required to issue the
final instructions to the train crew. They have gone on record disapproving of the
anti -whistling however are not the final decision authority. Currently there are up
to six unscheduled freight trains per week that may use the subdivision.
• York Region: regional road authority has two road/rail crossings in the Town
(Wellington Street East and St. John's Sideroad). Their policy requires pedestrian
gates at regional crossing which is over and above other authority requirements.
• Town of Aurora: municipal road authority has one proposed pedestrian crossing
and two road/rail crossings (Cousins Drive, Engelhard Drive and Centre Street).
Required to implement all capital works, make all necessary applications, obtain
all necessary approvals, establish an appropriate by-law, address liability
.insurance matters, coordinate with all interested. parties and satisfy all authority
concerns. Also required to fund improvements unless able to secure capital from
other sources.
Meeting with York Region to Confirm Next Steps in Process
On April 14, 2010, Town of Aurora and York Region staff met to discuss the outstanding
issues of implementing anti -whistling. Topics were pavement markings, signs, design
and installation of pedestrian gates, legal issues regarding liability concerns, and
issuance of a by-law to prohibit the sounding of the whistles at.road/rail crossings within
the Town of Aurora.
York Region and Town to Collaborate in Pavement Marking Upgrades
The Town and the Region will work jointly on the installation of pavement markings and
signs according to the Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM) Books. The Region will be
responsible for Wellington Street East and St. John's Sideroad crossings and the
Engelhard Drive and Centre Street crossings will be the responsibility of the Town.
York Region Policy Requires Pedestrian Gates be Installed
The installation of the pedestrian gates is a requirement of the Region of York as a
safety measurement for all Regional road crossings requesting anti -whistling. The
Region of York requested that the Town obtain quotes for the design and installation of
the pedestrian gates and present the findings back to the Region. The Region of York
informed the Town that the approximate cost for installing pedestrian gates is $130,000
per location (with a sidewalk on both sides of the road). Therefore, the estimated cost
for pedestrian crossing at the two regional locations is $260,000 of which 100 percent is
fully recoverable.
Proposed Railway Pedestrian Crossing at Cousins Drive
Cousins Drive is a dead end street located approximately 345 metres north of the
-10-.
General Committee Agenda ITEM # 2 - 4]
June 1, 2010
June 1, 2010 -4 - Report No. IES10-022
Engelhard Drive crossing. Currently there is a path across the train tracks at this
location that was created by pedestrians trespassing over the Metrolinx lands. Several
correspondences have been exchanged between the Town and Metrolinx regarding this
location in order to find the appropriate way to address the trespassing issue. Metrolinx
is well aware of the issues at this location and are providing control signage and fence
repairs as necessary to minimize public access.
Staff proposed the installation of a pedestrian crossing at this location in 2009. The
Town had contacted the School Board and Metrolinx to request cost sharing of the
pedestrian gate but was unsuccessfulin securing any .external funding. The cost
estimate to install a pedestrian gate and other related works to complete the crossing is .
approximately $160,000. Council approved $50,000 in the 2010 budget as a first step in
proceeding with this work. It is recommended that improvements now be considered at
this location as part of the overall project.
Analysis of Town Owned Crossings at Engeehard Drive and Centre Street
As the requirements for pedestrian gates are being imposed by the Region and not by
the rail authorities, the Town has two options to consider for the Town owned roads.
1) Install pedestrian gates with similar style to the regional pedestrian gates
2) Install fixed pedestrian mazes .
The two primary considerations for these options are; the importance of consistent
treatment at each crossing, and capital costs.
The ideal approach would be to install similar pedestrian gates at the Town owned
crossings. This would 'result in identical pedestrian treatment regardless of which
crossing is being accessed by the public. However, there is no requirement from either
the railauthorities or the Region to install pedestrian gates at these locations. Transport
Canada' has also .acknowledged that mazes are an acceptable method of controlling
pedestrian traffic. Transport Canada however does reserve the right to make their.
decision based solely on the suitability of the final -installation as determined by their
field inspection after all installations, are complete and it is at this point that they may
request similar treatment at all crossings.
The capital cast for a single sidewalk pedestrian gate crossing is estimated at $90,000
per location for a total cost of $180,000 for both Town crossings. Alternately the
estimated cost for a maze installation, similar to what is currently in place at St. John's
Sideroad, is $7,000 per location.
From a public safety and consistent treatment perspective, It is recommended that
pedestrian gates be provided at all crossings.
-11-
General Committee Agenda ITEM # 2 ' 5
June 1, 2010
June 1, 2010 - 5 - Report No. IES10-022
Limitations `to Access to Transport Canada Safety Improvements Fund
'Transport Canada has an existing program whereby up'to 80 percent of the capital cost
can be reimbursed for rail crossing improvement which increases crossing safety. As
this source of potential funding has a significant bearing on the affordability of this
project, staff requested additional clarification on the criteria for approval. Transport
Canada confirmed that this funding was only available to applications that meet the
following criteria:
The track must be under the ownership of a Federal Body. This section of track
is owned my Metrolinx which is a Provincial body:
• The reason for the modification was primarily to increase safety and not to
facilitate the implementation of anti -whistling. As our upgrades are related to
anti -whistling, this project would not qualify.
Therefore, this project does not qualify for funding from this source and must be funded
from Town resources. .
ALTERNATIVE TO RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Not proceed with the implementation of anti -whistling.
2. Proceed with mazes at the Town crossings that will reduce the net costs to the
Town from $360,000 to.a total of $194,000.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The current available budget is $50,000 for the Cousins Drive level railway crossing
(Capital Project No. 73127). .
The cost for the regional crossing is estimated at $260,000, of which the Region is
committed to funding 100 percent. Although the Region is currently. requesting that the
Town advance the construction costs, part of the recommendation in this report is to
request that the Region advance the funds upon confirmation of tender value. Should
the Region be unwilling to provide the advanced funding, the Town would have to cover
these funds until the project is completed and then make an application to the region for
reimbursement.
The cost for the two Town road crossings will be either $180,000 for pedestrian gates to
match those proposed at the regional crossings. This budget is to be provided through
the Municipal Road Infrastructure Investment Fund.
The proposed pedestrian crossing at Cousins Drive is estimated at $160,000. There is a
requirement for an, additional $110,000 which is to also be funded from the Municipal
Road Infrastructure Investment Fund.
-12-
General Committee Agenda
June 1, 2010
ITEM # 2 .6
June 1, 2010 - 6 = Report No. IES10-022
Two options have been identified for consideration. The first option considers pedestrian
gates at all crossings and the second option considers pedestrian gates at the regional.
crossings and the Cousins Crossing, and maze type pedestrian controls at the Town
crossings. The financial information is summarized in the following two tables.
Table No.1 : Financial Implications Option 1
Full Pedestrian Gates at All Locations
• ckZ�i
•.
�k
u�..yx lb �
•1
-uUtaA
" �.0.z'�^!�
.. t �
Li��icc�e�-`}qe -T�
Pavement Markings • Signs
i1�1
Pedestrian Gates:
EngelhardDrive'1
111
1 111
Centre Street
Cousi ns Drive•1
111
Pedestrian Gates for
�
• •Wellington®
. 1 1 1 1
• 1 1 1 i
®�
St. John's Sideroad)
Pavement Markings and Signs
Pedestrian Gate
Engelhard Drive
Centre Street
Crossings (Wellington Street East and
St. John's Sideroad)
Town's Net Cost after Reimbursement
CONCLUSIONS
20,0001 j (20,000)
7,000 I (50,000)
7,000
260,000 1 (260,000)
194,000
There are a number of steps that must be completed in the process of eliminating train
whistles at the Town's public railway crossings. A detailed safety.assessment has been
completed and a number of deficiencies have been identified that require rectification in
order to meet Transport Canada and York Region requirements before the train whistle
can be eliminated in the Town.
-13-
General Committee Agenda ITEM # 2-7
`June 1, 2010
June 1, 2010 - 7 Report No. IES10-022
Staff have completed as much of the approval process as possible to achieve whistle
cessation and must now -implement the capital works in order to move to the next phase
of the approval and implementatiorf process:
ATTACHMENTS
• Appendix "A" — Location of Level Crossings in the Town of Aurora
• Appendix "B" — Council Report PW09-057 - Train Anti -Whistle in the Town of Aurora
• Appendix "C" - Town of Aurora Anti Whistling Initiative
• Appendix "D" — Authorities Approval Process Map
PRE -SUBMISSION REVIEW
Executive Leadership Team meeting of May 5, 2010 and May 19, 2010
Prepared by. Jamal Massadeh, Traffic/Transportation Analyst, exL.4374
00,
(mar-&i� novskis Neil Garbe
Director of Infrastructure and Chief Administrative Office
Environmental Services
-14-
General Committee Agenda
June 1. 2010
APPENDIX "A"
ITEM # 2 - 8 ,
N
.eas"
OCrossings
V J. O. games Limited, 2007Orthophotogmphy- APPENDIX "A "
MAP SHOWING TOWN 'S CROSSINGS
Aulutc>nik
- 15 -
General Committee Agenda June 17 2010 APPENDIX "B" ITEM # 2 - 9
i TOWN OF AURORA
AURORA. GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORT No. PW09-057
SUBJECT: Train Anti -Whistle in the Town of Aurora
FROM; llmarSimanovskis; Director of Aublic.Works
DATE: November 3, 2009
RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT Council authorize staff to proceed with the train whistle elimination at all
Town's crossings in accordance with Transport Canada's' Railway .Safety
Directorate, Guideline No. 4 Procedure;
THAT Town's residents and relevant organizations be•notifred of the Town's
Intension to pass a by-law forbidding tho_use of whistles at alf Town's crossings as
per section 23.1 of the Railway Safety Act and as per Transport Canada's Guideline
No. 1 Procedure; .
THAT'the Council for the Corporation of the Town of Aurora petition Metrolinx and ,
the Canadian National Railwayto prohibit the soiinding of engine -whistles of trains .
at -the followingroad crossings, as required under the Canadian Pail d perating•Rulc
• Engelhard Drive - Mileage.29.17 -- Metrolinx, Newmarket Subdivision _
• Pedestrian Crossing- Mileage 29.79 - Metrolinx, Newmarket Subdivision :.
• Wellington Street East -Mileage 29,99 Metrolinx, Newmarket Subdivision
• Centre Street- Mileage 30.0.4 — Metolinx, NewmarketSubdivision
• St. John's Sideroad --Mileage 31,28 = Metrolinx, .Newmarket'Subdivision;
THAT the by-law shall not come into full force and effect! undi 'the necessary
approval has been granted by Metrolinx, 'the Canadian National Railway and
'Transport Canada and the necessarybuiletin to theiroperators has been issued; and
THAT a by-law be passed authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to sign a Whistle -
Cessation Liability insurance Agreement with IYletr6linx
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
The purpose of this report is to update Council of the next requirements involved forthe
creation of the anti -whistle by-law at all railway crossings in the Town of Aurora.
-16-
General Committee Agenda ITEM # 2 - 10
iune1.,2010
i
November 3, 2009 - 2 - Report No: PW09-057 ..
BACKGROUND
In April 2009, the Town retained the services of AECOM Canada Ltd. to undertake a
Whistle Cessation Study -Safety Assessment along the Newmarket subdivision atthefour
level crossings (Engelhard Drive, -Wellington Street East, Centre Street and St. John's-
.Sideroad) and one pedestrian crossing in the Town of Aurora. The. Anti -Whistle By-law
would be for 24 hours per day.as requested by Metrolinx.
COMMENTS
AECOM Canada Ltd. conducted a comprehensive safety crossing assessment of the four
level crossings extended one -quarter of a mile on either side of the crossing where the
whistling starts in accordance with Canadian Rail Operating Rules, C.R.O.R Rule •141(ii).•
The area inspected for this report was from mile 28.92 (one quarter mile south of
Engelhard Drive) to mile 31:53 (one -quarter mile north of St. John's Sideroad) and included,
all unrestricted active/passive crossings at the following locations: .
• .MI.29.17=Engelhard Drive
• Mi. 29.79 — Pedestrian crossing
Mi. 29.99 — Wellington Street East
i Mi. 30.04 — Centre Street .
. -Mi. 31.28 - St. John's Sideroad.
The study was, performed .using the following Transport Canada (TC) documents as a.
.. guideline: '
The Railway Safety Act — Sec. 23:1
.. Railway Safety Directorate Guidellne No: 1 (Eliminating Whistling)
• RTD-10 Technical Standards Manual (Part of TC propbsed new grade crossing•
regulations)
Transit Canada's Canadian' Road/Railway Grade Crossing Detail Safety '
Assessment Field Guide.
The safety assessment identified deficiencies that require mitigation in orderto achieve the .
•whistle' cessation in the Town of Aurora. Appendix °A" of this report contains the detailed
Grade Crossing Assessments showing all -deficiencies.
Town staff•metwith representatives from Metrolinx and Transport Canada on site to review
the deficiencies and identify suitable alternatives that would continue to meet the.intent 6f
required standards while enhancing public safety. These discussions identified a number of .
alternatives that would meet the intent of the RTD-10 Standard and that would form part of
the final safety review post implementation. This was a critical step in the process of
ensuring.that all technical and site consideration issues could be achieved by the Town
and to the satisfaction of the various authorities prior to committing financial resources.
i
.17-
Genbral Committee Agenda • STEM # 2 - 11
'June 1; 2010
_ November 3, 2009 3 . Report No PW09-057
1 The following items and next steps are required from the Town to proceed further with this
proposal:
• Confirmation fromthe Town of Aurora that the deficiencies identified in Appendix
"A" have been corrected.
• Proof of Notice to the public that the Town. of Aurora intends to pass a resolution
(bylaw) as outlined in Section 23.1 of the Railway Safety Act.
• A copy of the Town of Aurora's by-law as outlined in Section 23.1 of the Railway
Safety Act.
• Responses from each relevant association or organization listed on Appendix "B" as_
outlined in Section 23.1 of the Railway Safety Act.
The normal procedure McYrolinx follows on receipt of the application is to forward all the
i pertinent documents 'including.the safety assessment report to Transport Canada
requesting them to make a final review, of the crossings. On receipt of their concurrence
and. after arranging with the Town of Aurora for • insurance coverage, they will issue
instructions that the whistle, in .accordance.with CROR Rule 14 (1) (ii), not be sounded
within the specified area.
The issuance'of.these instructions only covers the required whistling as per CROR Rule 14
(1) (ii) at the subject crossings. Any other sounding of the whistle considered necessary, or
covered under other rules, would continue. In addition, should the Railway consider at •..
sometime in the future that whistling at these crossings is necessary, it shall be reinstated.
The ringing of the.engine bell will continue through the crossing.
ALTERNATIVE TO RECOMMENDATIONS
1) Not proceed with the implementation of the elimination of the train whistle -
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There is a 2009 approved capital project of $20,000 to address site Improvement
requirements identified in the deficiency report
CONCLUSIONS
There are a number of steps that must be completed in the process of requesting
elimination of train whistles at the Town's public railway crossings. A detailed safety
assessment has been completed where a number of deficiencies have been identified that
-18-
General Committee Agenda ITEM # 2' 12
dune 1, 2010
November 3 2009 - 4 - Report No. PW09-057
1 require. rectification in order to meet Transport Canada requirements before the train
whistle can be eliminated in the Town.
Staff will proceed with completion of site improvements as the administrative requirements
are completedpending approval of this report.
f ATTACHMENTS
• Appendix "A" - Detailed Grade Crossing Assessments.
Appendix "W — Relevant Organizations t
PRE- SUBMISSION REVIEW
Executive Leadership Team meeting of Ocfober27, 2009
propi?Fed by. damqlMassadeh, Traffic/Transportation Analyst, ext. 4374
❑mar Simanovskis Nell Garbe
Drreetor of Pubic Works Chief Admmisfra&e Owcer
_.... 1 ,..... ..._ .........
Cendral Committee Agenda
June 1 i 2010
-SUMMARY
ITEM # 2 - �]
Appendix "A"
Direction oETnin Tnffic
N
S
N
S
N
SIN
SI
N
S
Remove/Trim brush
INN
Upgpdc Grade Croasin W S Yem to include Gates as per section 12 of RTD40
Inswu RA-1 "Sto "
Install / mainain "No Tr . ssi "si s
Rebablutc / maintain Cross surface
Extend sidewalk aomin 'surface extension to a minimum of U m each side '
contiauotu aossin strdace [£cross" sdrfaces crated lm or less)
Install / air fence
Widen'aoss" surface to 8 metres -
R " / Relocate . al roast
air tes on s' al ntast
Relocate bun ow /Bun ow not locate at convu distance
Plaa not in aaordanoe to 0.2.2 RTD -10
Watnin al asseinbl are not io accordance to 18.1/183 max"wum 100 rnnr
Chan . Approach Wamin Time
Cba Gate arm decent time to wnEomt to RTD-10 standnnls '
Gan 'Gate arm ascent time to conform -to RTD-10 standards
eneral Committee Agenda ITEM # 2 - 14
une 1, 2010
Appendix «$„ r
Relevant Organizations
1. Mr. B. McDonagh
National Representative
CAW
3W 12th Street, 12th Floor
New Westminster, B.C.
V3M.4H6
2. Mr. Mike Wheten
National Legislative Director
Teamsters Rail Conference Canada
134 Albert Street, Suite 1110
Ottawa, Ontario
K1 P 5G4 .
3. 'Mr. Brehl
President
:Teamsters Rail Conference Canada.(MWFD)
2775 Lancaster Road, -Suite 1
Ottavva;.Ontar no
K1 B 4V8
- 4. Mr: K, Depuck
National Advisor • .
Teamsters Rail Coriferenc e' Canada (MWED)
.2775 Lancaster Road, Suite 7
Ottawa, Ontario
:K1'B 4V8
Genbral Committee Agenda
'June 1, 2010
t
ti
ITEM # 2 -15
AuR!4ORA
EXTRACT FROM GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING.NO. 09-25'
'HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, "2009
ADOPTED AT COUNCIL ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2009
8. PW09-067 — Train Anti -Whistle in the Town of Aurora
THAT Council authorize staff to .proceed with the train whistle elimination at all
Town's crossings in accordance with Transport Canada's. Railway Safety
Directorate, Guideline No. 1 Procedure; and
THAT Town's residents and relevant organizations be notified of the Town's
intention to.pass a by-law forbidding the use of whistles at all Town's crossings
as per section 23.1 of the Railway Safety Act and as per Transport Canada's .
Guideline No. 1 Procedure;.and
THAT the Council for the Corporation of the Town of Aurora petition Metrolinx
and the Canadian National Railway to prohibit the.sounding of engine whistles of
trains at the following road crossings,. as required under the Canadian Rail
Operating Rule 14(L):
• Engelhard Drive - Mileage 29.17 — Metrolinx, Newmarket Subdivision
• Pedestrian Crossing - Mileage 29.79 -- Metrollnx; Newmarket Subdivision
• Wellington Street East - Mileage 29.09 — Metrolinx,- Newmarket
Subdivision
• Centre Street — Mileage 30.04 — Metolinx, Newmarket Subdivision
• St. John's Sideroad. —.Mileage 31.28 — Metrolinx, Newmarket Subdivision;
and
ExtracUCorresaondence Routing Information .
O temal Correspondence was sent by Council go retarlatt
Yes
NO x
External Correspondence to be sent by.,
ACTION DEPARTMENT'
o birectorand tUIUME tar
Admin
Building
Corporate
Finance
Leisure
Works
X
Planning 1
i
ACTION STAFF:
(If other than above)
Trafflcffransportation Analyst .
INFO DEPT:
'(No actk required)
Le Legislative & Customer Services, L. Joyce
9 -
22